1 comment:

Hmm -- the early problem with top 10% was that it essentially relied on schools' remaining segregated in order to achieve racial diversity at the college level. Unfortunately, many schools that are 90%+ black/Latino are underfunded (unsurprising in a property tax system) and providing a poor education. This left the state schools in the position of having to take top 10% grads who needed remedial English and math courses to be college-level, while shutting out minority students who attended more competitive schools. In particular, it made the AP tests (once a great tool for determining a student's preparedness for college work) useless for admissions. Then there's the unfairness to students in tiny rural schools or private schools with only 30 in each graduating class.

Gaming the system by deliberately choosing a school where one feels confident of making top 10% is a phenomenon I'd heard of (I'd read about Asian students in LA doing something similar so they could mark "50% or more students on free/reduced lunch" on college apps). But I would have thought its utility limited to the big cities where there are multiple high schools in reasonable distance.

Personal Sites

Praise

"This is a weblog that is truly welcome in blogtopia — a new blog doesn't seem to be frantically trying to score points for any party. That does NOT mean it's afraid to take a stand or be critical....You really can't predict exactly where The Debate Link will come down on all issues. It's not chanting anyone's mantra." --The Moderate Voice,